I've recently noticed a contradiction, or perhaps I should say another contradiction inherent within the Calvinist system but I've not found a good opportunity to mention it in other discussions and so I thought I'd give it it's own thread.
It has to do with the two Calvinist concepts that are clearly in conflict with each other but it is one of those issues that is rarely detected by any Calvinist because the two contradictory issues are almost never brought up in the same conversation. The two concepts are compartmentalized and sequestered away from each other for reasons that I don't really understand except that to do otherwise would seem to put the whole system in jeopardy. I've looked and looked and looked for a published Calvinist response to the issue and have been totally unsuccessful in finding anything. If any of you know of something or can find anything on this, please post it!
So, let's get to it...
In a sentence, If God is just then the concepts of unconditional election and predestination cannot both be true, even by Calvinist's own understanding of these terms.
Let's first look at unconditional election and get a firm grip on what the Calvinist means by that term. Unconditional Election, the 'U' in the TULIP doctrines is related too, if not predicated on, "Total Depravity", the 'T' in the TULIP doctrines. It goes something like this...
Now, it is important to understand that, according to Calvinism, election is truly unconditional; that God does not save someone for any reason at all other than that it pleases Him to do so.
So, we have then a concept of Grace that was not caused by anything other than God's own will nor was it precipitated by anything outside of God Himself. The obvious and intuitive response to this is that it is fundamentally unjust, right? In fact, that objection has been responded to by the Calvinists many times. Charles Spurgeon's argument is echoed by nearly every Calvinist. It goes like this...
Now, so far as that goes, Spurgeon's argument here makes sense, right?! If people were all genuinely evil and God simply decided to save some while preserving the balance of the scales of justice with His own blood, that would work. But there's a problem that Calvinist just seem to be completely blind too. That problem being their own doctrine of predestination! It isn't just that some people are predestined to be saved, according the Calvinist, it's genuinely universal and exhaustive predestination. Every single event, whether past, present or future, including every act of man whether good or evil was predestined by God before anyone other than God Himself existed and He did so FOR NO REASON other than that it pleased Him to do so. In other words, according to Calvinism, people do evil things because God predestined that they do so.
Here it is in the Calvin's own words...
“The devil, and the whole train of the ungodly, are in all directions, held in by the hand of God as with a bridle, so that they can neither conceive any mischief, nor plan what they have conceived, nor how muchsoever they may have planned, move a single finger to perpetrate, unless in so far as he permits, nay unless in so far as he commands, that they are not only bound by his fetters but are even forced to do him service” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 17, Paragraph 11)
“thieves and murderers, and other evildoers, are instruments of divine providence, being employed by the Lord himself to execute judgments which he has resolved to inflict.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 17, Paragraph 5)
”He testifies that He creates light and darkness, forms good and evil (Isaiah 45:7); that no evil happens which He hath not done (Amos 3:6).* Let them tell me whether God exercises His judgments willingly or unwillingly.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 18, Paragraph 3)
“We hold that God is the disposer and ruler of all things, –that from the remotest eternity, according to his own wisdom, He decreed what he was to do, and now by his power executes what he decreed. Hence we maintain, that by His providence, not heaven and earth and inanimate creatures only, but also the counsels and wills of men are so governed as to move exactly in the course which he has destined.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 16, Paragraph 8)
...Nor ought it to seem absurd when I say, that God not only foresaw the fall of the first man, and in him the ruin of his posterity; but also at his own pleasure arranged it. (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23)[/indent]
So we have on the one hand, saving faith is NOT of free will but only by God's will and on the other hand we have that evil is also not of free will but is just as predestined as is the salvation of the saints. This is according to the actual founding documents of Calvinism themselves. There can be no disputing that this is, in fact, Calvinist doctrine! This is precisely what is meant when the Calvinist states that God is Soveriegn.
So, where is the contradiction?
If you're not a Calvinist, you already see it. If you are a Calvinist, you don't see it and it is very likely that you still won't see it after I spell it out for you.
Look again at Spurgeon's rebuttal against those who would "impune the justice of the Most High"...
This argument implies that the mechanism governing people's evil actions is different than the mechanism governing his repentance! It implies that the doctrine of Unconditional Election is the result of God's will but that the doctrine of Total Depravity is a result of the will of man! It implies that God is the Alpha and Omega of salvation but that man is soverign over his own condemnation. God is soveriegn over some things but not all things! The Calvinist would choke to death on those words! He would never premit himself to utter such a thing and yet that is precisely what they argue in order to maintain the idea that an arbitrary God is just. The argument doesn't work precisely because, according to their own doctrine, the fact that "we are all criminals" is no more the result of our will than is the unconditional election that they are attempting to defend.
So once again, one of the most basic concepts of Christianity, in this case 'justice', hoists the Calvinist by his own pitard.
Clete
It has to do with the two Calvinist concepts that are clearly in conflict with each other but it is one of those issues that is rarely detected by any Calvinist because the two contradictory issues are almost never brought up in the same conversation. The two concepts are compartmentalized and sequestered away from each other for reasons that I don't really understand except that to do otherwise would seem to put the whole system in jeopardy. I've looked and looked and looked for a published Calvinist response to the issue and have been totally unsuccessful in finding anything. If any of you know of something or can find anything on this, please post it!
So, let's get to it...
In a sentence, If God is just then the concepts of unconditional election and predestination cannot both be true, even by Calvinist's own understanding of these terms.
Let's first look at unconditional election and get a firm grip on what the Calvinist means by that term. Unconditional Election, the 'U' in the TULIP doctrines is related too, if not predicated on, "Total Depravity", the 'T' in the TULIP doctrines. It goes something like this...
We declare on scriptural authority that the human will is so desperately set on mischief, so depraved, so inclined to everything that is evil, and so disinclined to everything that is good, that without the powerful, supernatural, irresistible influence of the Holy Spirit, no human will ever be constrained toward Christ. (Charles Spurgeon, Sermons, Vol. 4, p.139).
I do not come into this pulpit hoping that perhaps somebody will of his own free will return to Christ. My hope lies in another quarter. I hope that my Master will lay hold of some of them and say, "You are mine, and you shall be mine. I claim you for myself." My hope arises from the freeness of grace, and not from the freedom of the will. - C.H. Spurgeon
... and I will go as far as Martin Luther, in that strong assertion of his, where he says, If any man doth ascribe of salvation, even the very least, to the free will of man, he knoweth nothing of grace, and he hath not learnt Jesus Christ aright. It may seem a harsh sentiment; but he who in his soul believes that man does of his own free will turn to God, cannot have been taught of God, for that is one of the first principles taught us when God begins with us, that we have neither will nor power, but that He gives both; that he is 'Alpha and Omega' in the salvation of men. (C.H. Spurgeon from the sermon "Free Will A Slave", 1855).
I do not come into this pulpit hoping that perhaps somebody will of his own free will return to Christ. My hope lies in another quarter. I hope that my Master will lay hold of some of them and say, "You are mine, and you shall be mine. I claim you for myself." My hope arises from the freeness of grace, and not from the freedom of the will. - C.H. Spurgeon
... and I will go as far as Martin Luther, in that strong assertion of his, where he says, If any man doth ascribe of salvation, even the very least, to the free will of man, he knoweth nothing of grace, and he hath not learnt Jesus Christ aright. It may seem a harsh sentiment; but he who in his soul believes that man does of his own free will turn to God, cannot have been taught of God, for that is one of the first principles taught us when God begins with us, that we have neither will nor power, but that He gives both; that he is 'Alpha and Omega' in the salvation of men. (C.H. Spurgeon from the sermon "Free Will A Slave", 1855).
Now, it is important to understand that, according to Calvinism, election is truly unconditional; that God does not save someone for any reason at all other than that it pleases Him to do so.
“God is moved to mercy for no other reason but that he wills to be merciful.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 22, Paragraph 8)
“… predestination to glory is the cause of predestination to grace, rather than the converse.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 22, Paragraph 9)
“Therefore, those whom God passes over, he condemns; and this he does for no other reason than that he wills to exclude them from the inheritance which he predestines for his own children.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christia/n Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 1)
“We cannot assign any reason for his bestowing mercy on his people, but just as it so pleases him, neither can we have any reason for his reprobating others but his will.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 22, Paragraph 11)
“… predestination to glory is the cause of predestination to grace, rather than the converse.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 22, Paragraph 9)
“Therefore, those whom God passes over, he condemns; and this he does for no other reason than that he wills to exclude them from the inheritance which he predestines for his own children.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christia/n Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 1)
“We cannot assign any reason for his bestowing mercy on his people, but just as it so pleases him, neither can we have any reason for his reprobating others but his will.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 22, Paragraph 11)
So, we have then a concept of Grace that was not caused by anything other than God's own will nor was it precipitated by anything outside of God Himself. The obvious and intuitive response to this is that it is fundamentally unjust, right? In fact, that objection has been responded to by the Calvinists many times. Charles Spurgeon's argument is echoed by nearly every Calvinist. It goes like this...
This election of God is sovereign. He chooseth as he will. Who shall call him to account? "Can I not do as I will with my own?" is his answer to every caviller. "Nay, but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God?" is the solemn utterance that silences every one who would impugn the justice of the Most High. He has a right, seeing we are all criminals, to punish whom he will. As king of the universe he doubtless acts with discretion, but still according to his sovereignty. Wisely not wantonly he rules, but ever according to the counsel of his own will. Election, then, is sovereign.
I come to the hardest part of my task this morning, Election in its justice. Now, I shall defend this great fact, that God has chosen men to himself, and I shall regard it from rather a different point of view from that which is usually taken. My defence is just this. You tell me, if God has chosen some men to eternal life, that he has been unjust. I ask you to prove it. The burden of the proof lies with you. For I would have you remember that none merited this at all. Is there one man in the whole world who would have the impertinence to say that he merits anything of his Maker? If so, be it known unto you that he shall have all he merits; and his reward will be the flames of hell for ever, for that is the utmost that any man ever merited of God. God is in debt to no man, and at the last great day every man shall have as much love as much pity, and as much goodness, as he deserves. (Sermon on Election 6:244)
I come to the hardest part of my task this morning, Election in its justice. Now, I shall defend this great fact, that God has chosen men to himself, and I shall regard it from rather a different point of view from that which is usually taken. My defence is just this. You tell me, if God has chosen some men to eternal life, that he has been unjust. I ask you to prove it. The burden of the proof lies with you. For I would have you remember that none merited this at all. Is there one man in the whole world who would have the impertinence to say that he merits anything of his Maker? If so, be it known unto you that he shall have all he merits; and his reward will be the flames of hell for ever, for that is the utmost that any man ever merited of God. God is in debt to no man, and at the last great day every man shall have as much love as much pity, and as much goodness, as he deserves. (Sermon on Election 6:244)
Now, so far as that goes, Spurgeon's argument here makes sense, right?! If people were all genuinely evil and God simply decided to save some while preserving the balance of the scales of justice with His own blood, that would work. But there's a problem that Calvinist just seem to be completely blind too. That problem being their own doctrine of predestination! It isn't just that some people are predestined to be saved, according the Calvinist, it's genuinely universal and exhaustive predestination. Every single event, whether past, present or future, including every act of man whether good or evil was predestined by God before anyone other than God Himself existed and He did so FOR NO REASON other than that it pleased Him to do so. In other words, according to Calvinism, people do evil things because God predestined that they do so.
Here it is in the Calvin's own words...
“The devil, and the whole train of the ungodly, are in all directions, held in by the hand of God as with a bridle, so that they can neither conceive any mischief, nor plan what they have conceived, nor how muchsoever they may have planned, move a single finger to perpetrate, unless in so far as he permits, nay unless in so far as he commands, that they are not only bound by his fetters but are even forced to do him service” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 17, Paragraph 11)
“thieves and murderers, and other evildoers, are instruments of divine providence, being employed by the Lord himself to execute judgments which he has resolved to inflict.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 17, Paragraph 5)
”He testifies that He creates light and darkness, forms good and evil (Isaiah 45:7); that no evil happens which He hath not done (Amos 3:6).* Let them tell me whether God exercises His judgments willingly or unwillingly.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 18, Paragraph 3)
“We hold that God is the disposer and ruler of all things, –that from the remotest eternity, according to his own wisdom, He decreed what he was to do, and now by his power executes what he decreed. Hence we maintain, that by His providence, not heaven and earth and inanimate creatures only, but also the counsels and wills of men are so governed as to move exactly in the course which he has destined.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 16, Paragraph 8)
...Nor ought it to seem absurd when I say, that God not only foresaw the fall of the first man, and in him the ruin of his posterity; but also at his own pleasure arranged it. (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23)[/indent]
So we have on the one hand, saving faith is NOT of free will but only by God's will and on the other hand we have that evil is also not of free will but is just as predestined as is the salvation of the saints. This is according to the actual founding documents of Calvinism themselves. There can be no disputing that this is, in fact, Calvinist doctrine! This is precisely what is meant when the Calvinist states that God is Soveriegn.
So, where is the contradiction?
If you're not a Calvinist, you already see it. If you are a Calvinist, you don't see it and it is very likely that you still won't see it after I spell it out for you.
Look again at Spurgeon's rebuttal against those who would "impune the justice of the Most High"...
This election of God is sovereign. He chooseth as he will. Who shall call him to account? "Can I not do as I will with my own?" is his answer to every caviller. "Nay, but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God?" is the solemn utterance that silences every one who would impugn the justice of the Most High. He has a right, seeing we are all criminals, to punish whom he will. As king of the universe he doubtless acts with discretion, but still according to his sovereignty. Wisely not wantonly he rules, but ever according to the counsel of his own will. Election, then, is sovereign.
I come to the hardest part of my task this morning, Election in its justice. Now, I shall defend this great fact, that God has chosen men to himself, and I shall regard it from rather a different point of view from that which is usually taken. My defence is just this. You tell me, if God has chosen some men to eternal life, that he has been unjust. I ask you to prove it. The burden of the proof lies with you. For I would have you remember that none merited this at all. Is there one man in the whole world who would have the impertinence to say that he merits anything of his Maker? If so, be it known unto you that he shall have all he merits; and his reward will be the flames of hell for ever, for that is the utmost that any man ever merited of God. God is in debt to no man, and at the last great day every man shall have as much love as much pity, and as much goodness, as he deserves. (Sermon on Election 6:244)
I come to the hardest part of my task this morning, Election in its justice. Now, I shall defend this great fact, that God has chosen men to himself, and I shall regard it from rather a different point of view from that which is usually taken. My defence is just this. You tell me, if God has chosen some men to eternal life, that he has been unjust. I ask you to prove it. The burden of the proof lies with you. For I would have you remember that none merited this at all. Is there one man in the whole world who would have the impertinence to say that he merits anything of his Maker? If so, be it known unto you that he shall have all he merits; and his reward will be the flames of hell for ever, for that is the utmost that any man ever merited of God. God is in debt to no man, and at the last great day every man shall have as much love as much pity, and as much goodness, as he deserves. (Sermon on Election 6:244)
This argument implies that the mechanism governing people's evil actions is different than the mechanism governing his repentance! It implies that the doctrine of Unconditional Election is the result of God's will but that the doctrine of Total Depravity is a result of the will of man! It implies that God is the Alpha and Omega of salvation but that man is soverign over his own condemnation. God is soveriegn over some things but not all things! The Calvinist would choke to death on those words! He would never premit himself to utter such a thing and yet that is precisely what they argue in order to maintain the idea that an arbitrary God is just. The argument doesn't work precisely because, according to their own doctrine, the fact that "we are all criminals" is no more the result of our will than is the unconditional election that they are attempting to defend.
So once again, one of the most basic concepts of Christianity, in this case 'justice', hoists the Calvinist by his own pitard.
Clete
